Because it implies the "climate crisis" is a real thing. For some it surely is, others - me among them - see this differently. Time will tell who got it right b

Because it implies the "climate crisis" is a real thing. For some it surely is, others - me among them - see this differently. Time will tell who got it right but just the fact that the media more or less dropped the "climate" scare when SARS2 hit the front pages should give those who are in the former camp something to think about. Only when it became clear that there was no more to be gained from pushing SARS2 scare stories did they return to the climate narrative. A LLM which has been trained to push "climate crisis" will end up producing agitprop [1] instead of objective output. The same would be true for a model which has been trained to deny anything related to climate change but thus far I have not seen any call for such training methods to be used. [1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/agitprop https://www.britannica.com/topic/agitprop